Abstract:

Ecosystem services dervied from the Podocarpus National Park provide benefits for local, regional, and global stakeholders. Different strategies concerning nature conservation, land-use and other biodiversity affecting activities will influenc the quality and quantity of ecosystem services in the region. Purpose of this (pilot) study is to assess the opinion and preferences of local and regional stakeholders of ecosystem service benefits from nature. Selected attributes (endemic plants, water quality, carbon uptake, proximity of forest) were presented in different levels and connected with prices (positive values indicate compensation, negative values indicate tax) in order to depict their monetary preferences and values they share with the presented ecosystem services.
First analyses show that willingness-to-accept is more selected than willingness-to-pay-scenarios. The attribute "proximity to forest" is not significant. Results suggesting for the main study to use a wider range of monetary values offered and to provoke more the affirmations persons were asked to agree or disagree to.

Additional info:

Following information describes the codes and their meaning for each of the listed attributes:
location
1 city (Loja or Zamora)
2 village (Corazon de Oro)
person
each person interviewed received a number from 1-109
setblock
the complete choice set with 27 choice cards is divided in three set blocks (interviews) (1-3), each containing 9 choices
biodiver
biodiversity attribute used in the study, 3 levels:
? 211 endemic plants (status quo scenario), level code 1 (status quo)
? 221 endemic plants, level code 2
? 201 endemic plants, level code 0
water
water attribute used in the study, 3 levels
? high contamination with bacteria, 2900 persons sick each year in Loja and associated part of Corazon de Oro, 600 persons sick each year in Zamora and associated part in Corazon de Oro, level code 1 (status quo)
? less contamination with bacteria, 2700 persons sick each year in Loja and associated part of Corazon de Oro, 400 persons sick each year in Zamora and associated part in Corazon de Oro, level code 2
? more contamination with bacteria, 3100 persons sick each year in Loja and associated part of Corazon de Oro, 800 persons sick each year in Zamora and associated part in Corazon de Oro, level code 0
climate
climate control attribute used in the study , 3 levels:
? no compensation of 2 tons of CO2, no additional emission of 2 tons CO2, no deforestation, no reforestation, level code 1 (status quo)
? compensation of 2 tons CO2 by reforestation of 20m x 25m, level code 2
? additional emission of 2 tons of CO2 by deforestation of 20m x 25m, level code 0
proximit
proximity of forest attribute used in the study, 3 levels:
? current distance, level code 1 (status quo)
? minus half of the current distance, level code 2
? plus half of the current distance, level code 0
cost
cost attribute used in the study, 7 levels:
? $0, level code 3 (status quo)
? $10, willingness to pay (WTP), level code 2
? $25, WTP, level code 1
? $45, WTP, level code 0
? -$10, willingness to accept (WTA), level code 4
? -$25, WTA, level code 5
? -$45, WTA, level code 6
setno
choice set number from 1-9 used in the interview
set_card
choice set number from 1-27 used in the study
option_scenario
options presented to the interviewed person of each of the 27 offered sets (scenarios) illustrated on the choice cards, indicated with 1, 2, and 3
choice
choice made by the interviewed person, indicated with 1 (not chosen scenarios indicated with 0)
gender
gender of the interviewed person, male 1, female 0
age
age of the interviewed person
educatio
education level of the interviewed person
? primary level 1
? secondary level 2
? university 3
? none 0
income
income classes from 1-10
incomec
average income of the interviewed person?s household per month
hhmember
number of members of the household of the interviewed person
A1-A28
Responses to the affirmations of the interview
? ?I agree? 1 ?very important? 1
? ?I rather agree? 2 ?rather important? 2
? ?neither nor? 3 ?neither nor? 3
? ?I rather do not agree? 4 ?rather not important? 4
? ?I do not agree? 5 ?not important? 5
Affirmations:
1. I like the fact that many kinds of plants and animals exist here
2. Diversity of plants and animals is not concerning me very much
3. Many animals and plants are a nuisance. It is better if they disappear for ever.
4. I think our children and grandchildren should also enjoy nature
5. Maybe some of the wild plants or animals can be useful one day
6. I want to see many animals and plants when I go to the forests
7. I do not feel comfortable when I hear that plants or animals here would disappear
8. Each life on earth has the right to live.
9. It would be nice to have lot of types of plants or animals here, but I actually do not care too much about it
10. If many types of plants and animals disappear here it would affect my standard of living in a negative way
11. I want that many types of plants and animals can survive here in our region, even if I never see them
12. Water availability for me and my household is
13. Water quality for me and my household is
14. Water availability is not a problem for me and my household
15. Water quality is not a problem for me and my household
16. Climate change is not affecting me or my household
17. I think climate change is more a problem of the rich countries in this world
18. Climate change is everywhere and can be very dangerous if we do not do something against it
19. I can not do anything to stop climate change
20. The forests in our region are good against climate change
21. We need our forests here in our region to mitigate the effects of climate change
22. We need more forests here in our region to mitigate the effects of climate change
23. I spend a lot of my time working in the forest
24. I go to the forest for recreation
25. I do not feel very comfortable to live near a forest
26. I do not want to walk long distances to get to the next forest
27. I like to live near a forest
28. Having a forest close to home makes life more easy
B2
Evaluation of the confidence of the interviewed person
? ?confident? 1
? ?rather confident? 2
? ?neither nor? 3
? ?rather not confident? 4
? ?not confident? 5
B2
Evaluation of the understanding of the interviewed person by the interviewer
? ?understood well? 1
? ?rather understood? 2
? ?neither nor? 3
? ?rather not understood? 4
? ?not understood? 5
B3
Evaluation whether the interviewed person was in time pressure by the interviewer
? ?yes? 1
? ?rather yes? 2
? ?neither nor? 3
? ?rather no? 4
? ?no? 5
B4
Evaluation whether the interviewed person was emotionally involved with the topic by the interviewer
? ?yes? 1
? ?rather yes? 2
? ?neither nor? 3
? ?rather no? 4
? ?no? 5

(1) The external data user commits that they will not pass any data nor passwords to thirds, that enables access to the data downloaded.

(2) The external data user warrants that the downloaded data are neither distributed to third persons and parties nor sold or used for commercial purposes.

(3) To publish data and results derived with the help of the data by the external data user needs approval in the sense of copyright issues. The allowance for publication have to be requested from the data owner stated in the metadata.

(4) Data owner whose unpublished data is used, have to be included in the list of authors in a suitable way as sorted out under (3) .

(5) If the data owner refuses the right for publication or any other use, all data have to be deleted at the external user entirely and permanently